In the News

Professor Emeritus William C. Banks Fact Checks President Trump’s Claims About the Insurrection Act

Professor of Law Emeritus William C. Banks fact-checked claims made by President Trump about the Insurrection Act for the CNN article “Fact check: Trump’s false claims about the Insurrection Act.”

In response to claims that there would be no court cases if he invoked the Insurrection Act, Banks said it’s “categorically false” that there couldn’t be any court cases.

Banks said the act gives the president “tremendous discretion” and that it is “very heavily weighted on his side.” But it’s “of course not true,” Banks said, “to say a court wouldn’t review what he’s done”; the courts would consider lawsuits over whether there have been violations of the law’s own requirements or violations of the Constitution.

Professor Katherine Macfarlane Weighs in on Federal Judge Shopping Rules

Professor Katherine Macfarlane spoke with Law.com for an article on developments in federal judge shopping rules. This stems from dozens of attorneys backing lawsuits challenging Alabama’s law banning gender affirming care for transgender youth in 2022. U.S. District Judge Lilies Burke of the Northern District of Alabama set in motion a seemingly “unprecedented” probe into their suspected judge shopping practices.

One attorney, Carl Charles, faces criminal charges for allegedly lying during his testimony before a three-judge panel of a jurist from each federal district in Alabama.

Despite the growing controversy over the topic, experts say it’s not illegal. After all, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure give plaintiffs one chance to voluntarily dismiss a complaint without prejudice, according to Macfarlane, who studies judge shopping matters and served as the lead author of an amicus brief in Charles’ civil sanctions appeal.

Syracuse Medical-Legal Partnership Directors Featured on Upstate Medical University’s The Informed Patient Podcast

The Syracuse Medical-Legal Partnership (SMLP), an interdisciplinary clinical collaboration between the pediatric unit at SUNY Upstate Medical University and Syracuse University College of Law, was recently the focus of Upstate Medical University’s The Informed Patient podcast.

The SMLP provides law students with real-world experience as they work with Upstate medical providers to identify legal issues that might involve the health of patients and their families at SUNY Upstate Medical University’s University Pediatric and Adolescent Center and the Pediatric to Adult Transition Clinic for Complex Health.

SMLP Director and College of Law Professor Suzette Meléndez and Sarah Reckess L’09, SMLP Director and SUNY Medical University Assistant Professor of Bioethics and Humanities, were interviewed for the podcast.

Students in the SMLP are encountering several aspects of the law. “What we have been seeing pretty consistently are housing issues and issues with regard to advance directives. And by that I mean people who think they might need a guardianship or a power of attorney or a health care proxy, something designed to support the patient in making medical decisions,” said Meléndez.

She continues, “We also have seen inquiries about the establishment of wills and estates law, particularly from parents who are seeking to provide for their child long-term, and where that child may have a disability. We also see issues of family law. We see issues with regard to domestic violence. We have seen issues regarding custody and where there’s uncertainty as to which parent gets to make medical decisions concerning that child.”

Professor Jenny Breen Provides Legal Background on Sanctuary Cities

Professor Jenny Breen recently spoke with The Daily Orange on the legal issues around sanctuary cities or jurisdictions and federal immigration law.

According to Breen, sanctuary cities are cities, counties, and states that refuse to enforce federal immigration policies on behalf of the federal government.

Breen said these “sanctuary jurisdictions” are legal under the 10th Amendment, which recognizes states and cities as sovereign entities from the federal government. She said the government cannot “co-opt” cities into doing its work.

Professor Lauryn Gouldin Discusses Recent 2nd Amendment Cases with Law 360

Crandall Melvin Professor of Law Lauryn Gouldin discussed with Law 360 the impact that several recent Federal Circuit Court Second Amendment cases may have on upcoming U.S. Supreme Court cases.

Three years ago, in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the justices leaned on historical ties to modern firearm laws to rule that New York’s statute restricting carry licenses outside one’s home to those who can show “proper cause” was unconstitutional. Similarly, they may be inclined to strike down the federal gun ban as it applies to nonviolent felons for lack of a historical analog, according to Gouldin.

“There are some direct conflicts between the circuits, and those conflicts are strongest when you have different as-applied challenges for people whose underlying convictions weren’t for violent felonies,” she said.

Professor Emeritus William C. Banks Discusses President Trump Naming Antifa a Terrorist Organization

Professor Emeritus William C. Banks spoke with the Christian Science Monitor on President Trump naming Antifa a terrorist organization after the killing of Charlie Kirk.

“There’s a lot of debate and bluster – particularly when something terrible happens in the United States – [over whether] we need a law criminalizing domestic terrorism,” says Banks. “You can’t do it, because ugly words are protected just as pleasing words are.”

Yet, Mr. Trump is not the first person to suggest a domestic terrorism designation, says Professor Banks. The subject has been a matter of off-and-on debate for years, both on the right and the left. But “cooler heads eventually prevailed,” in those efforts, he says.

“We’ve built our nation on a principle of tolerating dissent,” he adds. “So long as these individuals are merely dissenters, they should be protected by the Constitution. It’s really one of the most important principles in our society.”

Professor Jenny Breen Discusses Union and Labor Law Aspects of Taylor Law with Spectrum News

Professor Jenny Breen discussed with Spectrum News the application of the Public Employees’ Fair Employment Act, or Taylor Law, in the ongoing litigation surrounding the state Correctional Officers and Police Benevolent Association strike from earlier this year.

“While the strike is understood to be the key economic weapon for private sector workers, the people who wrote the Taylor Law felt like strikes were not appropriate in the public sector. So public sector employees in New York state are banned from striking under the Taylor Law, and there are pretty harsh penalties for striking workers when they violate that prohibition,” says Breen.

Professor Shubha Ghosh Discusses the Google Antitrust Ruling Remedy

Crandall Melving Professor of Law Shubha Ghosh spoke with The National News Desk on the remedy ruling in the Google antitrust case. The remedy was less severe than expected as Google could retain its Chrome browser.

“I think the government will appeal it, just to be complete about this and I think they might have some issues. I don’t know how much they’re going to push on the decision not to divest,” said Ghosh, Director of the Syracuse Intellectual Property Law Institute.

“These market power rulings are very market-specific, so there might be a completely different market issue in these subsequent cases,” Ghosh said. “That definitely affects what the remedies are in the case.”

At Law360, Ghosh said “In the tech space, courts are wary of undoing the benefits of the technology that has been developed over time.” This article may be behind a paywall.